The New Jersey Attorney General’s office on Thursday asked federal judge Michael Shipp to deny the NCAA/NFL et al motion to exclude the state’s own motion for summary judgment during oral argument to be held on Dec. 18.

Last week, the state offered its 40-page response to the sports leagues’ seeking of a summary judgment order in their lawsuit designed to prevent the state from offering Nevada-style sports betting. The leagues say the New Jersey law blatantly violates a 20-year-old federal law limiting that amount of gambling only to Nevada.

But the state not only rejected that argument, it has asked the court to dismiss the case either because the plaintiffs have no standing to sue, or because the law itself is unconstitutional on a variety of grounds:

The leagues also asked for two extra weeks beyond the Dec. 5 deadline to submit up to 25 pages of written argument countering the state’s position of opposing summary judgment. The additional time would be for the leagues to respond to the STATE’s seeking of summary judgment.

The state opposes that, too, and both sides have been a bit snappish in court filings all week on whether the state ambushed the leagues with the counter-summary judgment play.

The state’s attorneys say they had suggested in various meetings that they might take this approach, with the leagues saying it barely came up.

The court so far has been denying anything that slows down this relatively brisk pace regarding a suit that was filed in August. The state clearly favors the “hurry-up offense” while the leagues would prefer to “walk it up the floor,” to use the lingo of the NBA – another of the plaintiffs.

There have been 90 documents files so far in a case that is less than four months old, including 22 since the start of last week: the plot thickens.